On the bustling streets of Kathmandu and across Nepal, a new generation has been making its voice heard. The so-called Gen-Z movement, driven by young people demanding change, erupted into national consciousness in early September 2025. What began as a protest against a government-imposed social media ban quickly transformed into a broader call for good governance, employment opportunities, and an end to irregularities that have long plagued Nepali politics.
The events of September 8 and 9, 2025, now loom large in the country’s collective memory. According to Onlinekhabar, nineteen young people lost their lives on September 8 during the initial protests. The following day, destruction swept through public and national properties—an act former President Ram Baran Yadav described as both "regressive and pre-planned." In a candid interview, Yadav did not mince words about the government’s failure: "The incident of September 9 happened because of the leaders’ weaknesses. On September 8, 19 young people lost their lives. They keep saying there was infiltration that day. Those who run the state should have known about such infiltration."
Yadav’s criticism was pointed, targeting the political leadership of both the CPN UML and the Nepali Congress, who were in power at the time. He argued that the Gen-Z movement’s demands—good governance, jobs, transparency, and open access to social media—were not only legitimate but essential for Nepal’s future. "The Gen Z movement still insists that solutions must be found within the framework of the current constitution, and this is the correct stance," he said. However, Yadav was unequivocal in attributing responsibility for the chaos: "The way public and national properties were attacked in the destruction on the second day, that was a regressive design. Even if Nepalis themselves did it, it was still a regressive act. The incident of Bhadra 24 appeared to be pre-planned. The state remained unaware. Those running the government bear full responsibility."
While the dust has begun to settle, the Gen-Z movement finds itself at a crossroads. As reported in The Kathmandu Post, there is a growing public perception that the movement is losing momentum. The lack of united leadership and the informal, loosely connected coalition of activists have made it difficult to sustain a coherent strategy. Despite these challenges, the movement recently took a significant step by submitting a draft memorandum to Interim Prime Minister Sushila Karki, outlining their core demands and seeking formal recognition of their struggle.
But is this enough to keep the flame of reform alive? Some observers worry that the Gen-Z movement is losing focus on its primary goal: transforming Nepal’s political system. As one activist told The Kathmandu Post, "There is a palpable fear that politics will not truly change—that the status quo, defined by the dirty practice of politics, will again prevail." If even the most engaged young activists feel disillusioned, it raises troubling questions about the movement’s future and the likelihood of real change.
One of the central dilemmas facing the Gen-Z movement is the risk of co-optation by the very traditional parties it seeks to reform. The return of established political forces, eager to reassert their dominance, could sap the movement’s energy or redirect its leaders into the labyrinthine world of party politics. While some see this as a potential opportunity for genuine reform from within, others warn that it could simply perpetuate old patterns under new guises. As the Republica analysis put it, "If it is merely about masquerading or faking internal reforms, then these overtures are a trap."
At the heart of the Gen-Z movement’s initial surge was the ban on social media. This single act, seen by many as an attack on personal freedom and civic engagement, galvanized thousands of young people to take to the streets. The protest quickly expanded to address deeper issues—corruption, nepotism, and the lack of economic opportunity. In an unexpected twist, the tragedy of September 8 also sparked a generational awakening. Young Nepalis began writing op-eds, organizing debates, and engaging with the political process in ways not seen in years.
Yet, as the immediate outrage fades, sustaining this level of engagement poses a new challenge. Many worry that without a clear, united strategy, the movement could fragment or lose its sense of purpose. The question now is how to keep the millions of young people who marched in September involved in Nepal’s political life.
Some commentators argue that the key lies in education and political literacy. As one activist told The Kathmandu Post, "Most youths lack political knowledge. This is not surprising. After all, how many young people spend time reading news? How many invest time in reading op-eds? If they do not take time to become politically literate, how can they form informed opinions on complex issues?" The movement’s leaders are now grappling with how to foster a deeper understanding of the constitution, federalism, and the mechanics of democracy among their peers.
There is also debate about the best way forward. While some believe that pushing for the retirement of the older generation of politicians could rejuvenate Nepal’s political system, others caution that simply replacing faces will not solve deeper structural issues. As the Republica analysis noted, "Removing the old guard will not automatically clean up politics, but it would be an important milestone—an indispensable and necessary step."
In the meantime, the proliferation of new political parties—many led by young candidates—offers both hope and risk. There is a real possibility that the next elections will produce an even more fragmented and ineffective legislature. Still, some see a silver lining: new members of parliament could bring fresh ideas and a spirit of compromise to a system in desperate need of both.
But politics is not the only avenue for engagement. Many young people are turning to journalism, forming independent watchdog groups, or creating study circles to learn more about governance and anti-corruption strategies. These efforts, while less visible than street protests, may prove crucial in sustaining the movement’s momentum over the long term.
As Nepal looks to the future, the legacy of September 8 and 9 remains uncertain. The sacrifices made by the Gen-Z protesters have awakened a new political consciousness, but the path ahead is fraught with obstacles. Whether the movement can overcome internal divisions, resist co-optation, and continue to push for meaningful reform will depend on the resilience and commitment of Nepal’s youth. For now, the hope is that they will remain engaged—learning, debating, and insisting on a better future for their country.
